Ah yes, tomorrow is Groundhog Day. You know, Punxsutawney Phil is more accurate with his predictions than so-called climate scientists and their global warming models.

Speaking of Groundhog Day, here's an interesting question. How long was Bill Murray stuck in Groundhog Day?
more...

Posted by: CDR M at 06:00 PM | Comments (574)
Post contains 420 words, total size 5 kb.

2013 political fundraising numbers out and outside conservative groups are doing very well.

Four Republican-leaning groups with close ties to the party’s leadership in Congress — Crossroads and its “super PAC” affiliate; the Congressional Leadership Fund; and Young Guns Action — raised a combined $7.7 million in 2013. By contrast, four conservative organizations that have battled Republican candidates deemed too moderate or too yielding on spending issues — FreedomWorks, the Club for Growth Action Fund, the Senate Conservatives Fund and the Tea Party Patriots — raised a total of $20 million in 2013, according to Federal Election Commission reports filed on Friday.

“This is by far the biggest nonelection year we’ve ever had,” said Matt Hoskins, executive director of the Senate Conservatives Fund, which has feuded with party organizations. “It shows how committed people are to electing true conservatives and to advancing conservative principles.”

Now when you add in the party committees like the RNC, National Republican Senatorial Committee, The Republican Governor's Association and the National Republican Congressional Committee, the "establishment" is going to have far more money.

The thing is the outside groups don't have to go dollar for dollar with the establishment ones because the outsiders are usually targeting their money to a few primary campaigns. The "establishment" groups have to spend money playing defense against the outside groups and the Democrats, so a 1:1 dollar match isn't all that important.

No wonder Team GOP types like to pretend that the Ted Cruz and Senate Conservative Fund types are only in it for the filthy money...they are losing their stranglehold on the life blood of politics and the poor dears don't like it very much.

Fun fact: Karl Rove's Crossroads fund only raised $6 million last year. Now, it's an off year after a Presidential year in which they raised hundreds of millions so maybe they backed off a bit to avoid donor fatigue and will ramp up this year. Or...people didn't like giving all that money with precious little to show for it.

Time will tell if it's a blip or the start of a trend.

But it's something these outsider groups should keep in mind...it's great to raise all this money but you can't be seen wasting it, either on non-candidate expenses or on races where you back too many loser.

Like anything else in life, if you want people's money, you better produce.

Posted by: DrewM at 10:08 AM | Comments (269)
Post contains 410 words, total size 3 kb.

While you're waiting for Dave's official Cavalcade of Elbows, you might want to check this out. This is more egregious than the usual Guess the Party situation.

As Newsbusters tells the tale, within the short space of 40 seconds, (MS)NBC's Brian Williams reported on two politicians caught up in scandal -- Tray Radel, the Florida Congressman who was busted with cocaine and who just resigned over that infraction, and former New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin, on trial for 21 counts of bribery in accepting hundreds of thousands of dollars for awarding city contracts to companies that bought his favor.

Within 40 seconds, these two stories were reported (briefly). The party affiliation of one of the men was reported, but not the other.

Can you guess the party which was prominently mentioned in this story, and which party went entirely unmentioned?

Spoiler Alert: Yes, you can guess. More specifically, you can guess with 100% accuracy.

For years, I have made this point: This persistent bias in reporting can be almost entirely cured by simply writing, into each news organization's style book, a directive as to when to report a misbehaving politician's partisan affiliation (always) and where in the story to do so (the headline, always).

There is one simple reason the media does not include such an unbiased rule in their stylebooks: They wish to be biased. To make an even-handed rule would limit their ability to do just what Brian Williams did last night -- to use their own partisan leanings to decide if they should note the political affiliation of a corrupt or embarrassing politician -- and they do not wish to be even-handed.

They want to keep on doing this, forever, and forever, and forever more.

By the way: Also note that Tray Radel's infraction can be characterized as "personal misbehavior" (a la Clinton) whereas Nagin's trespass -- bribery -- gets right to the heart of job performance, that is, his position within the political structure.

Thus, Nagin's misbehavior is more political and has more to do with actual political outcomes than Radel's, which is more personal, and has almost nothing to do with political issues our outcomes.

And yet, and yet. Brian Williams wanted you to know Radel is a Republican, and he wished desperately to make you forget that Nagin is a Democrat.

At the link, Newsbusters recounts some recent media refusals to label Democrats as such (for example, Bob Filner, the 20 year Congressman and progressive wingman to Nancy Pelosi, turns out to not belong to any political party, in the media's reportage at least). Video at the link too.

Via Instapundit.

Posted by: Ace at 09:25 AM | Comments (117)
Post contains 443 words, total size 3 kb.

Greetings gardening morons and ‘ettes! Welcome to your Saturday gardening thread. Without further ado, here's some thread-fodder...

Fun facts about plants from Better Homes & Gardens:

Tomato juice is the official state beverage of Ohio, honoring the part A. W. Livingston of Reynoldsburg, Ohio, played in popularizing the tomato in the late 1800s.

(Pretty sure homemade root beer is the official state beverage of Utah.)

From a botanical standpoint, avocados and pumpkins are fruits, not vegetables, because they bear the plants' seeds. Rhubarb, on the other hand, is a vegetable.

This is just an excuse to post a clip from one of my favorite guilty pleasure movies:

If you've never seen Zorro: The Gay Blade, I highly recommend it. Very silly. George Hamilton is one of the kings of camp.

Below the jump... take it away, WeirdDave!
more...

Posted by: Open Blogger at 07:53 AM | Comments (266)
Post contains 1219 words, total size 8 kb.

Happy Saturday, horde.

Today begins a series on the yin and yang of the car world: The Mutts and Jeffs. The Beauties and the Beasts.

In the car world, beauty is somewhat relative, and without the awkward, ill-designed dog of a car that offends one's senses, could we truly appreciate the graceful lines of a beautiful automobile?

Countrysquire reports this week on those cars that are so ugly, some might call them cute:

This plan for this weekÂ’s Saturday Car Thread post was to write about the most beautiful cars on the planet. Knowing how our discussions typically progress (or digress), it made sense to begin with an ugly car thread today and follow with the good stuff next week.

A quick internet search will pull up a number of top-10 lists of cars that have been judged to be ugly, but some cars make those lists simply because they were poorly built or were hated for some other reason. I tried to keep this list focused only on styling and not let other negative characteristics come into play. While most of vehicles listed were available here in the states, some from other markets were simply too bad to ignore. Eastern-bloc built cars are not included because they all were awful, as were those built before the late ‘20s. There were literally hundreds of different auto manufacturers before the Great Depression and the coach-building technology was very primitive. Most closed cars had an upper body comprised of a simple wooden frame wrapped with sheet metal, and the designs never integrated well with the rest of the car. As we’ll see next week, that all changed in the 1930s.

So letÂ’s get our hate on and look at a few of these:

Citroen Ami:

‘Ami’ is one of the few French words that I know. It means friend, of course, and who doesn’t like to have an ugly friend? The color coordination on the one pictured is horrible, but does seem to fit it quite well.

more...

Posted by: Open Blogger at 12:00 PM | Comments (357)
Post contains 860 words, total size 7 kb.

Let me be the first to welcome you to February. It's a chilly but blissfully short little month where sports go to die (unless you're one of those hockey-loving weirdos like Drew M. and Ben K.).

Posted by: andy at 03:57 AM | Comments (296)
Post contains 44 words, total size 1 kb.

Sean Trende took a cue from AmishDude, and considered the concept that the GOP is outright terrified of winning big. Ok he didn't consider it, he ran with it:

The idea is twofold. First, a landslide would present as much of a problem as it does an opportunity for those who might want to revisit the issue in 2015, especially if the GOP establishment (or its donors) believes this is a must-do before the 2016 elections. The base would be even more agitated after a big victory, and appalled at any compromise on this issue if the GOP picks it up in 2015. In addition, absent a majority, Democrats wouldnÂ’t have the same incentive to support a bill that contained further compromises, especially since they already view the bill as a compromise in the first place. TheyÂ’d be better off watching Republicans flail and fail to pass a bill as their own base abandons them; this is roughly what happened in the mid-2000s.

This makes sense of the timing issue. Perhaps the GOP really did plan on letting the issue die last summer, when taking the Senate looked like a 50-50 shot, and breaking even in the House seemed like the order of the day. But then the Obamacare rollout hit, and suddenly Republicans looked like they might enjoy a 2010 redux.

If thatÂ’s the setup, then BeutlerÂ’s observation in No. 3 also makes sense. If a fight is inevitable, have it now rather than a much messier one in 2015. Maybe the Senate Democrats wonÂ’t be able to swallow a bill with tougher enforcement provisions and without a path to citizenship, and they will own part of the death of immigration reform. Or maybe theyÂ’ll pass it, and the issue will be partly cleared off the table for an election year. For an establishment Republican, thatÂ’s win-win.

But I think it thereÂ’s another, broader factor involved. When you get past the top tier of recruits -- the Mike Rounds and Shelley Capitos of the world -- and get into the more marginal seats that could fall for Democrats in a wave election, you start to get into candidates like Ken Buck. People have almost written Buck off, but I havenÂ’t; while I think there are smarter choices for the Colorado GOP, he barely lost in 2010, and conditions for Democrats are no better right now than they were in 2010. ThereÂ’s a similar crop of candidates in second-tier House races. The last thing the leadership wants is another crop of Ted Cruzes and Rand Pauls in the Senate, nor does it want another dozen Tea Partiers in the House.

This isnÂ’t to suggest that the GOP leadership is affirmatively doing this to minimize Republican gains. What I am saying is that they are closer to neutral about big gains than we might think, given the problems that the surge in base enthusiasm caused for them after the 2010 elections. So if they check agenda items like this off the list now and still get a landslide, great. But if they end up cooling off the baseÂ’s enthusiasm and get a narrow, establishment-based Senate majority and keep the House, well, thatÂ’s not the end of the world either. In fact, it would mean a more docile caucus in both Houses, which is good for those who run those Houses.

This hypothesis makes sense to me as well, because I can actually see a very, very large gain for the Republicans if conditions as they stand continued or even worsened for the Democrats over Obamacare. One of the core assumptions of this theory- that the GOP is facing big gains- absolutely holds water.
more...

Posted by: CAC at 06:04 AM | Comments (358)
Post contains 1099 words, total size 7 kb.

Honestly, I didn't know a thing about it. Now I know slightly more than nothing-- the basics, at least.

If you've been seeing headlines like "The Good Guys Have a Real Chance in Ukraine," and then wondering who the good guys are and what exactly they have a chance at, then MKH's brief primer will be useful to you.

So now that I know the very basics, I can actually cover it, I guess.

Here's a digest of the digest: Essentially the country is split approximately in two by rival sympathies. One faction has more support in the East-- and is more influenced by, and feels more connection with, Russia. The other faction feels closer to the EU.

The Western-oriented faction would like to join the EU, and reap the benefits from that association (which benefits they see in neighboring Poland). The Eastern-oriented faction wants to take Russia's deal -- by which Russia buys a lot of credits in their economy, and thus injects a lot of needed capital into the Ukraine -- and part of that deal is, I guess, not joining the EU.

The Russia-leaning faction actually controls the country and has imposed -- get this -- tyrannical clampdowns on dissent and protest (passed into law by a... secret vote) and protesters are being killed by police brutality but of course that's embargoed on Ukraine TV and all they show are penguins. Oh wait, that's what they showed during Turkey's brutal crackdown on protesters. In the Ukraine they're showing delighted citizens delivering cookies and cake to smiling State Policemen.

Oh and check out the Podcast thread below.

Posted by: Ace at 04:02 PM | Comments (338)
Post contains 291 words, total size 2 kb.

Crap! I got so busy at work I forgot to do the podcast post. The actual audio portion of the post has been available for 12 hours or so in the sidebar and via the iTunes/RSS/Stitcher subscription options, though, so there's that.

###

Townhall.com editor and Fox News contributor Guy Benson joins Ace, Gabe, Drew and John to talk about how the 2016 GOP field is shaping up, the Democrats' disaster prep. for 2014 and other fun topics.

Ace also treats you to an impersonation or two.

Questions & comments here: Ask the Blog

[MP3 Download] | Subscribe: [RSS] | [iTunes]

Follow on Twitter:
AoSHQ Podcast (@AoSHQPodcast)
Ace (@AceofSpadesHQ)
Drew M. (@DrewMTips)
Gabriel Malor (@GabrielMalor)
John E. (@JohnEkdahl)
Andy (@TheH2 and @AndyM1911)

Open thread in the comments.

Posted by: andy at 03:18 PM | Comments (43)
Post contains 128 words, total size 2 kb.

I'm looking for fun, happy things and I'm not finding them. So let me know.

A few weeks ago I wrote about the depression that comes with the fading sun. I would again encourage everyone to find something new that interests them, whatever it is, and pursue that hobby, or that interest, whether it's starting to build model planes again (one guy I know is having a second childhood with models, and is enjoying it) or becoming an expert on the Revolutionary War.

I believe the human animal thrives on achievement -- I think we have a deep-seated internal imperative towards creating, learning, advancing, and competing -- and the animal also becomes depressed from stasis.

This may seem obvious, but people who are actually doing something, whether walking every other day (and walking a little faster and farther each time), or writing that damned book they always have known was in them, or learning a new language, or deciding to learn how to rebuild a car, or making an effort to trace one's ancestors or reconnect with distant family feel a sense of accomplishment.

There is something inherently happy about forward motion, and something inherently depressing about standing still.

People are bewildered at why I decided to learn French. Well, for one reason: Look, I do this same thing every day. That doesn't mean I don't like blogging, and it doesn't mean I'm not grateful for the wonderful position I'm in, being able to just do this job I invented for myself and feed myself by doing so. (Though I should be more grateful.)

Nevertheless, let's face it, the parameters of this particular job have not changed in ten years. I have not really gotten a promotion; I haven't learned some new skill, like video or photo manipulation (though, Good Lord, I really ought to, huh?).

I do the same thing, pretty much, day in, day out. Most of you -- even those of you who would think of themselves as kind of doing the same thing every day -- would be shocked at how far one can take the concept of just, literally doing the same thing everyday.

I'm in the same position every day (on the couch), the same hours, looking at the same sites for news, making -- ummmm... let me confess, making pretty much the same jokes and the same observations I've been making for ten years.

The other day someone, Jack Straw I think, said he liked my joke about "abusing myself with the repetitive mechanical fury of a misfiring industrial robot."

Yeah, let me let you in on a little secret, Jack: That joke is literally ten years old. I wrote that in 2004. It is a verbatim lift. It just popped back into my head, and first I wrote a bad (new) version of it, but then I used my memory, and I reconstructed the exact line I wrote ten years ago.

Now I don't think it's too shabby of me to wait ten years before recycling a joke. But I am stressing the stasis I'm in. The holding pattern. The Same Day No Different Than The Next syndrome.

So I'm trying to do some things I didn't used to do. I feel my brain has gotten lazy and has diminished. My brain does the same light trotting every day around the same well-worn track in the pen. Like a caged farm animal, it just sort of gets fat and lethargic.

So I decided, a year back, I was going to start exercising it more, and exercising it in different ways. I have no talent for languages -- none. I always hated languages. They were the one subject I felt absolutely no inherent talent at.

But I always thought it was cool when James Bond gave a quick greeting in Italian or French, so. I decided to do that.

I started reading again. I had not read for pleasure in... ten years? Fifteen? More like twenty. Sure I'd read something every once in a while, but only very once in a while.

And I try to read some things I never read about before.

Has any of this worked?

I think so. Not a lot, but I do feel that I've accomplished something in now being able to translate a French newspaper article without reaching for the dictionary. (Well, I have to reach, but only once or twice per article.)

I do feel like a better, happier, more interesting person now that I've been reading again, and putting new thoughts into my brain. The old thoughts -- the ones that had been in there for 30 years -- were getting a little stale.

I was going to say "I don't know if any of this advice will help anyone out there," but that's not true. I do know it will help you. How could it not? How could learning something new, or making yourself better and more interesting and more alert to the wonder of the world, not help someone?

So, as I asked a few weeks back: What interesting stuff are you working on, or, what interesting stuff do you think you'll give a try?

Posted by: Ace at 02:04 PM | Comments (688)
Post contains 869 words, total size 5 kb.